Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Protocol - Intervention

Pre‐operative education for hip or knee replacement

This is not the most recent version

Collapse all Expand all

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To determine whether pre‐operative education in patients undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement improves post‐operative pain and mobility, reduces length of stay, increases compliance with post‐operative exercise routines, and reduces the incidence of deep vein thrombosis.

Background

Hip replacement and knee replacement are commonly performed surgical procedures, with more than 800,000 hip operations carried out worldwide each year (Knutsson 1999). The main indication for total hip or total knee replacement is intractable pain that cannot be controlled by conservative treatment alone (Brady 2000). Leading causes of such pain include arthritis, trauma, congenital abnormalities, dysplasia and osteochondritic disease (Brady 2000). However, the main clinical reason for this type of surgery is osteoarthritis (Gammon 1996).

Osteoarthritis is a disabling disease that involves degradation and destruction of the hyaline cartilage in synovial joints. The most powerful risk factor for osteoarthritis is age, with 68 per cent of individuals over the age of 55 exhibiting radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis (Elders 2000). In steadily ageing populations the prevalence of osteoarthritis is increasing, and consequently the impact on chronic disability and costs is rising (Elders 2000). In the absence of a curative treatment, management of osteoarthritis is directed primarily towards relief of pain and functional limitation. Surgery is a treatment option for patients in whom medical treatment has failed to provide adequate symptom relief (Creamer 1998).

Total hip or total knee replacement is a major surgical procedure, followed by a period of hospitalisation incorporating in‐patient physiotherapy and usually further out‐patient rehabilitation (Palmer 1999). These events can be stressful, compromising the patient both physically and psychologically (Gammon 1996). If a patient is unduly anxious, recovery may be affected, prolonging length of hospital stay and hence cost of care and patient well‐being. It is hypothesised that patient education prior to undergoing total joint replacement will reduce stress and enhance the outcome immediately following surgery.

Average length of stay for hip replacement surgery varies from 5 to 39 days (Wang 1997). For knee replacement surgery, length of stay ranges from 7.3 ± 2.6 days to 11.8 days (Lingard 2000; Weingarten 1995). Length of stay in hospital depends on the physical recovery of the patient, which relates to post‐surgical complications, pain, coping ability, compliance, and mobility and independence levels. Of particular importance in determining length of stay is the occurrence of post‐operative complications, the most serious of which is the presence of a pulmonary embolus resulting from deep vein thrombosis (Brady 2000). This occurs in 50‐70 per cent of all unprotected (i.e. non anti‐coagulated) patients, and is a leading cause of post‐surgical morbidity and mortality (Morris 1998). Prevention of deep vein thrombosis can potentially be aided by pre‐operative assessment to identify risk factors and post‐operative exercise (Morris 1995).

A second cause of early stage morbidity for hip joint replacements concerns dislocation, which may result when post‐surgical contraindications and protocols are not followed. It is essential that patients undergoing total hip joint replacements understand positions to avoid. This understanding is potentially enhanced by pre‐operative education.

It is generally agreed that perception of pain and anxiety is heightened when patients feel a lack of control over their situation. By ensuring full understanding of surgery and post‐operative routine and promoting physical recovery and psychological well‐being through preparatory informative sessions, it is hypothesised patients will be less anxious, have a shortened length of stay, suffer fewer post‐operative complications and be better able to cope with post‐operative pain.

Objectives

To determine whether pre‐operative education in patients undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement improves post‐operative pain and mobility, reduces length of stay, increases compliance with post‐operative exercise routines, and reduces the incidence of deep vein thrombosis.

Methods

Criteria for considering studies for this review

Types of studies

Randomised and quasi‐randomised trials will be sought.

Types of participants

The study population is people of any age undergoing planned total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) for osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Trials which include participants undergoing THR or TKR for reasons other than osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis will be included only if these participants represent less than 10 per cent of the entire study population, or if the results for this sub‐group are presented separately. All types of prostheses (e.g. ceramic, metal or hybrid) will be included.

Types of interventions

Two categories of interventions, commonly delivered together, will be considered:
(a) pre‐operative education: any verbal, written or audiovisual information regarding the surgery and its post‐operative course delivered by a health professional within six weeks of surgery
(b) pre‐operative instruction of post‐operative exercise routine: any verbal, written or audiovisual information regarding the post‐operative exercise routine delivered by a health professional within six weeks of surgery

Any comparator will be considered. Studies comparing various methods of delivery of pre‐operative education in the absence of a 'no pre‐operative education' control will be excluded.

Types of outcome measures

The outcome measures of interest are:
(a) post‐operative pain (short and long term)
(b) length of stay
(c) compliance with post‐operative exercise routine
(d) patient satisfaction
(e) occurrence of post‐operative deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
(f) range of motion
(g) post‐operative anxiety
(h) post‐operative mobility

Search methods for identification of studies

Relevant randomised and quasi‐randomised trials in any language will be sought using the following methods:
(a) searches of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, Australasian Medical Index, British Library's Inside Conferences, PEDro database, Science Direct, UK NHS National Research Register
(b) handsearch of the Australian Journal of Physiotherapy (1954‐2001)
(c) review of the reference section of retrieved articles

Data collection and analysis

One reviewer (SM) will conduct the searches and identify a pool of potential trials for inclusion. Unblinded trial reports will be reviewed independently by SM and SG according to the selection criteria. Disagreements on the inclusion of studies will be resolved, where necessary, by recourse to a third reviewer. The methodological quality of included trials will be independently assessed be the same reviewers against the following criteria:
(a) was the study described as randomised?
(b) was the allocation concealment adequate?
(c) were the participants blinded?
(d) was there blinded outcome assessment?
(e) was there a description of withdrawals and drop‐outs?
(f) were the results analysed according to intention‐to treat?

These criteria will be reported against in the table of included studies. Since it is not possible to blind care providers in procedural trials, no formal quality assessment scale will be used.

Data extracted from the included trials will be entered twice using RevMan's double data entry facility. Only outcomes specified in the protocol will be included in the review. Continuous data (e.g. length of stay, visual analogue scales of pain) will be entered as means and standard deviations, and dichotomous outcomes (e.g. occurrence of deep vein thrombosis) as number of events. Long ordinal scales (e.g. Likert scales of pain) will be treated as continuous measures.

In the absence of significant heterogeneity, and given sufficient included trials, results will be combined using weighted mean difference or standardised mean difference (dependent on comparability of scales) for continuous data, and relative risk for dichotomous data (given the event is not rare).

Sub‐group analyses will be carried out by site of joint replacement (hip or knee), presenting results for hips, knees and both joints together.

Two sensitivity analyses will be performed according to whether:
(a) the allocation to intervention or control groups was truly randomised or quasi‐randomised, to explore the potential for selection bias
(b) the outcome assessment was blinded, to explore the potential for performance bias associated with knowledge of the intervention
If either of the sensitivity analyses affects the results of the review then conclusions will be made conservatively.